Comments on: Have we lost the war on drugs?http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/01/06/have-we-lost-the-war-on-drugs/
Headlines from the Hot Air authorsTue, 31 Mar 2015 21:03:13 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.9.3By: astoneriihttp://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/01/06/have-we-lost-the-war-on-drugs/comment-page-1/#comment-2239367
Sun, 06 Jan 2013 20:07:12 +0000http://hotair.com/headlines/?p=236412#comment-2239367

A lot of peripheral arguments.
How about comments on objective reality?

Have the use of drugs, over time, been shown to have had positive or negative effects on society?

Has the war on drugs prevented the usage? Has the war on drugs had an even more detrimental effect on society? Hint, I have to go through massive levels of bureaucracy just to get the V!codin I need to have a somewhat close to normal life, and the war on drugs was the slippery slope that led to that.

Should a social order have the right to issue prohibitions on behaviors that have negative effects on the lives of the majority of people in the society?

Yes, but the drug use itself does not have a direct impact on society unless it is performed in public. Convict on the actual crimes, not the pre-crimes. Owning a gun is a pre-crime activity that leads to murder. Thus you are falling right into the gun prohibitions argument here!

Should any behavior between individuals or groups of people be allowed until society experiences negative effects?
If this approach is taken, how and what is the marker before action can be taken to reverse those behaviors or actions?

Mimzey on January 6, 2013 at 12:44 PM

The problem is when government subsidizes their bad choices. We need to get out of the safety net business and let private citizens and private charity do that work, where they have much better results than the government.

First, I don’t any Libertarians who support even a single prohibitionist law. Now – some do favor a ban, or at least controls on abortion – but that’s about it. So I don’t know where you’re finding these “hypocritical” libertarians.

Maybe you missed that I was bantering with John the Libertarian who said he was leaning towards legalization, but felt that legalizing drugs would prevent him from putting people behind bars for other crimes they might perpetrate, particularly intrafamilial crimes.

Second – how can you throw a single stone at libertarians when you, a CONSERVATIVE are in fact … hypocritical?

I am sure I have a few places where I am hypocritical. Name a human being that does not… Then again, I do not see where I do one thing and then demand it be illegal for someone else.

You talk about FREEDOM and smaller government – yet you have no problem in placing governmental control on who a woman has sex with vis a vis the prostitution laws. Do you find it’s the role of government to control what a woman does with her body with a consenting adult?

I do not have a problem with prostitution. God does. That said, I never said it should be illegal. I might be willing to have some levels of safeguards placed on it, such as regular medical exams to ensure they are not spreading diseases while getting paid for it. hell, I might even not have a problem with diseased prostitutes just so long as they are required to show their johns (there is that name again) their list of diseases.

Second – you always want to keep GUNS FREE but you want to ban drugs.

Nope, I am on the side of legal drugs, ALL OF THEM. I am then on the side of employers being able to discriminate against drug users, or, if they are stupid, non drug users. We need people to do menial jobs for little money…

You complain when the liberals enact laws like bans on SuperSized Sodas, or sugary treats … but you still insist on telling a gay guy he can’t marry another gay guy.

Um, that is because the word Marriage has a specific meaning. I am not willing to allow disgusting human being to be given the power to change my language. They can make all the contracts they want with themselves, and when they prove the value of their version of monogamous relationships, society will reward them. On the other hand, what you want is for gays to be given respect and ceremony without earning it.

You’re just like liberals – most of you “conservatives”.

I agree, plenty of pathetic people wrap themselves in the term “conservative” when they are no such thing.

If you were really for LIBERTY – you’d be FOR the concept of self-ownership – you would not support prohibitionist laws.

Yet you do support them and that is why conservatism has a bad rap right now.

HondaV65 on January 6, 2013 at 12:29 PM

You really are an ignorant person when it comes to who I am.

I am all for liberty. But that “liberty” is no such thing when I am financially held liable for someone else’s actions.

Get rid of the government sponsored taxpayer supported safety nets and I could care less what someone else does.

What a bunch of horse crap.
If we lost the war on drugs it is because we left the battlefield You stop drugs at the border and not on the sidewalk.By then it is too late.
All this writer is suggesting is that we reduce crime by ignoring it.
It is no different than the way some school districts lower their drop out rates by just passing everybody.
It is your typical liberal tactic of redefining something as something better.
It is a lie.

NeoKong on January 6, 2013 at 10:23 AM

The Government has no business dealing with drugs (other than certifying its purity) than it does mandating the barrel length of my gun. The “War on Drugs” like the “War on Poverty” or the “War on Younameit” is constitutional overreach. Every Cop is corrupted by it, every department and it feeds 500,000 gang members which, if we were a sane Country, we would round up and deport to Countries of Origin. End it now.

Have the use of drugs, over time, been shown to have had positive or negative effects on society?

Should a social order have the right to issue prohibitions on behaviors that have negative effects on the lives of the majority of people in the society?

Should any behavior between individuals or groups of people be allowed until society experiences negative effects?
If this approach is taken, how and what is the marker before action can be taken to reverse those behaviors or actions?

First, I don’t any Libertarians who support even a single prohibitionist law. Now – some do favor a ban, or at least controls on abortion – but that’s about it. So I don’t know where you’re finding these “hypocritical” libertarians.

Second – how can you throw a single stone at libertarians when you, a CONSERVATIVE are in fact … hypocritical?

You talk about FREEDOM and smaller government – yet you have no problem in placing governmental control on who a woman has sex with vis a vis the prostitution laws. Do you find it’s the role of government to control what a woman does with her body with a consenting adult?

Second – you always want to keep GUNS FREE but you want to ban drugs.

You complain when the liberals enact laws like bans on SuperSized Sodas, or sugary treats … but you still insist on telling a gay guy he can’t marry another gay guy.

You’re just like liberals – most of you “conservatives”.

If you were really for LIBERTY – you’d be FOR the concept of self-ownership – you would not support prohibitionist laws.

Yet you do support them and that is why conservatism has a bad rap right now.

Is it made out of macadam? Is it a supporter of former Philly mayor John Street? Is it so common as to be able to be picked up off the street for free?

This is about one of the most disingenuous arguments I’ve come across on this topic. Congratulations. I’m not easily taken aback.

So, was whiskey a “street drug” during Prohibition? If you use opium in a den, does it cease to be a “street drug”?

And as far as you shooting Habib, the local 7-11 manager for selling your 17 year old grandkid a six pack, I’d delight, as a member of your jury, in putting you into the chair for that one.

JohnGalt23 on January 6, 2013 at 11:09 AM

I’m amazed. You really think there is no difference between Whiskey and Opium? I think you are smart enough to know that street drugs in this context refers to those commonly sold by creepy people while watching out for the cops. Could be I’m wrong on that though.

As for Habib, first I said nothing about shooting him. I might just beat the crap out of him. On the other hand I might just make it a mission to ensure his children are provided equal opportunity by providing them some harmful things to ruin their lives.

You seem to be in a biotch mood today.

]]>By: trigonhttp://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/01/06/have-we-lost-the-war-on-drugs/comment-page-1/#comment-2239180
Sun, 06 Jan 2013 16:50:29 +0000http://hotair.com/headlines/?p=236412#comment-2239180The War on Drugs is a failure. Same as Prohibition was. We should go back to the way things were before. The government used to make some revenue from the sale of narcotics. Google ‘Narcotic Tax Stamps’. Stamp collectors collect them.

I suspect we have a bigger problem with legalization, now. I think it has totally corrupted the government. God only knows how much our officials are making on the side from all of this.

Wow. Deep. Name a group that is less for this than libertarians. Other than anarchists.

You’re absolutely right, every time I see a red light I run it because, wow, man, don’t tell me what to do.

John the Libertarian on January 6, 2013 at 11:16 AM

You really need to take about 20 classes on reading comprehension.

My statement was that as a philosophy it says there should be absolute minimal government, but as individuals, you all have your own little pet laws you intend to keep. In your instance, because some drug abuser in your life screwed you or someone close to you over, you are still on the fence on whether or not people should have the freedom to chose what they consume.

I also followed up with an example of the expressed hypocrisy of libertarian argument. My neighbor cannot play music so loud it damages the use of my home, but under the same breath, the Westburo Church can use a bullhorn to disrupt a funeral. The difference, one claims it is political speech…